October Term 2017 · Docket 16-1161
Can courts manage partisan gerrymandering claims?
Appellants seek a judicial remedy for extreme district maps. Appellees argue courts lack standards to fix them.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Tseytlin argued social science metrics do not solve manageability problems.
Ms. Murphy stated plaintiffs failed to identify a workable standard.
Mr. Smith claimed the state map effectively nullifies democracy.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 54-8 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 54-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 22-36 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 22-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 30-26 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 30-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 40-48 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 40-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 56-8 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 56-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 8-50 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 8-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 12-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 12-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 12-36 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 12-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-40 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 38-40 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 38-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 10-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 56-26 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 56-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 38-32 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 38-32
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether federal courts can resolve partisan gerrymandering disputes. The parties disagree on the availability of legal standards.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 3, 2017.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 12-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 12-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 38-40 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 38-40
What each side wants
Appellants want a court to strike down the district map.
Appellees want the court to dismiss the gerrymandering claim.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
What each side says
Appellants argue the map effectively nullifies democratic representation.
Appellees argue no judicially manageable standard exists for this claim.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
What the justices asked
Justice Breyer asked if courts can manage the standards.
Justice Kagan noted the social science metrics appear scientific.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 54-8 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 54-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 22-36 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 22-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 30-26 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 30-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 40-48 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 40-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 56-8 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 56-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 8-50 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 8-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 12-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 12-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 12-36 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 12-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-40 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 38-40 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 38-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 10-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 56-26 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 56-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 38-32 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 38-32
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of judicial power over electoral maps. It determines whether voters can challenge extreme districting in court.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 54-8 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 54-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 22-36 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 22-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 30-26 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 30-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 40-48 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 40-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 56-8 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 56-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 8-50 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 8-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 12-22 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 12-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 12-36 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 12-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-40 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 38-40 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 38-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 10-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 56-26 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 56-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 38-32 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 38-32
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 48-20 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 48-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 14-36 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 14-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 24-10 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 24-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 45, lines 42-48 — Transcript, file page 45, lines 42-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 64, lines 42-36 — Transcript, file page 64, lines 42-36
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.